Will using M mount lenses on my SL2-S solve my problems?

[lencap]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

The only downsides to my SL2-S/50mm Summicron f/2.0 ASPH kit is weight and size.  My goal is a lightweight all day long SL2-S one lens kit.  

My SL 50mm f/2.0 ASPH lens isn’t overly heavy, but it is bulky, and wonder if those who use M mount lenses with the M to L adapter are happy with the results?

What is bothering me is that while an M mount lens may be the answer for a single lens kit solution, I give up autofocus, which is a big part of why I went to the SL line.  Even though I love M body cameras I can’t get critical focus, making them a non-starter for me, especially with Summilux speed lenses.  I sold the Q116 I bought new - I’m  just not a 28mm perspective shooter.  I carry an iPhone 14 Pro with me all the time - it’s my casual non critical image maker with any focal length I need from 24-whatever with digital zoom.  Truth be told, the RAW files are very good - I’ve posted about it earlier.  But I view it as an appliance, not satisfying to use, and not appropriate for creative use.  That’s why I stay with Leica.

Still, the idea of a lighter weight SL kit makes me wonder if that may indeed be the best solution.  The local dealer suggests Sigma 85mm or Panasonic 105mm for distance if I want to keep weight/cost down with L mount lenses, but I’ve convinced myself that Leica glass is why you buy Leica bodies, and resist non Leica solutions.  I sold my 24-90 zoom, despite the 6 prime lens equivalents in one body as the weight wore me out, but I miss it a lot. It was the most flexible lens I ever had, and I loved owning it, even though it stayed home more and more.  I did buy the Panasonic 20-60 lens, but I’ve not even taken a single picture with it.

So, for those that went with M mount lenses, are you happy with your decision, and does it make you take your SL kit with you more often?  Any regrets?  For those with other solutions, what did you decide?

Edited September 23, 2023 by lencap

[Huss]

Use an M10 or M11 and add the EVF.  Will be much smaller than the SL2 and have the same capability as with both you don't have AF with M lenses.

Or get the new Nikon ZF with 40mm f2 SE AF lens...

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[mschuette]

I have both, the M11 and the SL2-S. I use all my M lenses on the SL2-S. I rarely use the SL lenses as they are bulky. The EVF is so good that it is really easy to focus the M lenses. Even moving objects like my kids. Much easier than with the Visoflex 2 on the M. Another advantage: the SL2-S has excellent image stabilisation. I also love the M11 for its size. But since I wear glasses I find it harder to focus with the rangefinder. 

To answer you question: yes, I am really happy using M lenses on my SL2-S!! I do not need AF in most situations. It’s just a matter of practice to focus the M lenses. Even with the 50 Summilux M most of my images are in focus. Thanks to the brilliant EVF!!

 

[Jeff S]

Have you tried various solutions to aid critical focus with an M in RF mode (vision correction, including astigmatism, glasses and/or diopter, camera/lens calibration checks, etc)?  I use my M lenses (28/35/50mm) on M bodies with RF only. The SL2 serves complementary needs for me: zooms, shorter/wider focal lengths, weather sealing, state-of-art EVF and focus magnification, IBIS/OIS, AF, etc.  Different tools, and different user experiences. If Leica eventually makes a system that has the SL2 benefits in a smaller, lighter package, I’ll be interested.
 

Jeff

[Stuart Richardson]

It seems you are creating your own problems here. If the SL2 is too large and bulky for you with one of its lightest and smallest lenses, it does not seem like it is the right body for you. Adding M lenses on there instead will be a bit more compact, but ultimately it is still a substantial camera, and as you say, you will be giving up the autofocus which is a main feature of the system. Furthermore, M lenses require an extra step on the SL cameras in comparison to using them on M cameras. You generally need to focus wide open and then stop aperture down to take the picture. With a rangefinder you are not looking through the lens so this is not important. Focusing manual focus in the EVF is great for accuracy but if you have an enlarged area it makes it hard to photograph moving objects, because as you zoom in you lose track of the overall composition and the moving object might exit the zoomed in area. You can focus without magnification, but that is trickier and less accurate. To me at least, M lenses are best on M cameras and L mount lenses are best on L mount cameras. 

Leica makes great lenses, it is true, but the 50mm you have was largely designed by Panasonic, and Panasonic also holds the patent on the 24-90mm zoom you love. I seem to recall in your previous posts that you do not print, which means that you are unlikely to really see a huge difference in resolution at least between a good lens from Leica and a good lens from another company. (Resolution is not the only difference, of course, but it is a big one). None of this is meant as a deficiency, just an assessment of your usage. The best reason to use the SL system is that you enjoy the handling and overall use of the camera, but if you don't then it makes little sense to keep trying to get it to work.

I would suggest that you consider a camera that was purpose made more for what you seem to be looking for. A Leica option would be the CL. Another option would be the Fuji X series, which has a large variety of bodies and lenses, many of which are of excellent quality and with a tactile design that is not so removed from Leica. Another option would be the upcoming Zf that Huss mentioned...a compact retro styled mirrorless camera with excellent specs. From an image quality standpoint it is unlikely that these cameras will let you down. As you note, even your phone is capable of taking excellent images at this point. Most current cameras are capable of superb results, especially if you are not printing (or at least not printing large). It seems rather sisyphean to trudge along with a camera that you find challenging to use.

Edited September 23, 2023 by Stuart Richardson

[dpitt]

My experience with M lenses and R lenses on my SL (601) are completely satisfactory. Both of them feel small compared to the native SL lenses. And the extra size and weight of R lenses does not matter much if the body is as heavy and large as the SL is.

I found that focus peaking will not help me much on the SL, because it shows items as 'in focus' that for my taste are not really focused. So it is too tolerant. I always use the 6x magnification to focus on the subject and then re-frame, and that works for me. I even found that I miss more shots because of AF acting up than by the time needed to focus manually. YMMV ( I am used to using the M with MF)

Edited September 23, 2023 by dpitt

[lencap]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks for the suggestions, much appreciated.

When I had the M bodies I tried various correction diopters without much success.  It's not just astigmatism, I have lots of "floaters", cataracts and some other age related issues.  The RF mode was helpful, but seemed to mimic the intent of the SL body, so why not just get an SL body was how I looked at it.

I do miss the M body experience, but the focusing grid for longer length lenses isn't usable for me.  I tended to limit myself to 50mm lenses, occasionally longer, but not often.

The form factor of the M is a pure design, and I love everything about it.  Using a Visoflex on the M works for many people, but to me it's like driving a sports car with an automatic transmission - works great, but something is missing.  When I went to the dealer and used it on his demo camera with the M11 it seemed to be almost like shooting with the SL body.  As much as I want to love the M11, it seems to me that it's just a step or two removed from the SL experience.  I rarely recomposed my shots when I saw something coming into the frame on my M body, but it was nice to know that the scene would soon change.  EVFs don't allow that.

As others mentioned, I also find the SL body IBIS very helpful, especially since I don't use flash.  It lets me handhold more steadily with the extra body weight, and fits my hand wonderfully.  In that regard the heavier SL body reminds me of shooting with my Nikon F bodies years ago.  Heavy, but well balanced and "serious" in hand.  The SL even balanced pretty well with the 24-90, but when that lens extended the balance was challenging.  I also couldn't carry it well on the Leica strap - it kept flopping around and other straps didn't work too well either.

Your posts encourage me to explore the M to L adapter solution with M lenses, but I still balk a bit at the cost, and in the end I'd be swapping the SL 50mm for a M 50mm for most of my shooting.  The SL lens is 14.2 ounces, 2.9x3.3 inches in size.  The M 50mm Summicron is 8.5 ounces 1.7x2.1 inches in size.  The M to L adapter add 0.51 inches and 2.5 ounces to the SL body.  That makes the total difference 3 1/4 ounces in weight, about 0.7 inches in length, and 1 1/4 inches in width difference.  Including the body weight the SL is almost a pound heavier.  

The biggest difference is perceived size, and about an inch in both dimensions.  Not insignificant, but the giving up autofocus will force me to choose between zone focus/hypercritical focus, or trying to quickly manually focus.  I don't often shoot wide open, but that's what I'm exploring now.  With a manual lens that's the biggest challenge, and that's why I'm struggling.

I do enjoy the SL body, but hopefully Leica is working on some solutions - maybe a smaller SL body option, or, perhaps even better, a 45 or 50mm Q4.

[SoarFM]

If you truly don’t need AF, the 50 Summilux makes for a much smaller package and a great lens.

We are living in a world where most people make their photos with an iphone or similar size phone camera. Carrying a camera the size of an SL2 with corresponding AF lenses for walk around seems a bit much these days. It is for me.

You want an M over your shoulder and only 1 or 2 other lenses in lens wraps in a small rucksack. Camera bags should be left at home or in the room during your all day excursions. My humble opinion…

 

 

[Jeff S]

10 minutes ago, lencap said:

 The RF mode was helpful, but seemed to mimic the intent of the SL body, so why not just get an SL body was how I looked at it.

 

?  The RF is, for many, the heart of the M, and doesn’t remotely mimic the SL or any EVF-based body.

I solve my distance and astigmatism issues with glasses, using thin and flexible frames.  And, with aging eyes, I now add a +.5 diopter, still using my glasses, to optimize focusing.  Experimentation with trial diopters at my local optician proved useful.  A well calibrated system - RF and lenses - is of course essential.

But each person must determine his/her own best approach.

Jeff

[MFT-Lehrling]

vor 14 Stunden schrieb lencap:

So, for those that went with M mount lenses, are you happy with your decision, and does it make you take your SL kit with you more often?  Any regrets?  For those with other solutions, what did you decide?

It depends, if you are shooting wide open alle the time, then the SL2 will be the much better camera, since getting critical focus is somewhat easier. But you have a "real" camera body in your hand, its bulky, big, not the M-Experience. It can be intrusive for others, everybody sees you now as "photographer" with a proper camera. The M has the charm and siluette of a small old camera, that oftens is not regarded as "dangerous" by others. You can get away with a lot less attention or friendlier encounters. 

The main reason for me to get the SL2/S was that sometimes the RF-Experience was not as usefull as an state of the art EVF. I Started first with only M-&R-Lenses. But stoped using the later ones because of the size with adapter...
The M-Lenses still work like a charm, especially the 90 F2.0, 50 F1.4 and F0.95 is a real blessing for close up portraits where you have much more control. Also for attaining fast the right exposer in difficult lightning conditions. Of course there are all the other aspects like using cheap AF-Lenses and Zooms. Or the beautiful APO-SL-Prime-Line.

But at the end of the day you have the handling of a big camera, with small lenses. 

If i move with only 1 body and something closer than 28mm, i strongly tend to the SL2/S nowadays. The M barely makes it in the 1 camera bag... for me the Upsides of the SL2/S makes the size neglectable (i use every M with grip and thump-rest, difference is not hat big to begin with). I often shoot wide open or against harsh light/ challenging dynamic range conditions. For landscape its a blessing to take something with more than 135mm and have cheap, light alternatives. 

--> for me it made the colour M nearly obsolete 😅. (truth to be told, i think the Q2 is the best camera, so i never was a rangefinder fan from the beginning, but came to like it more and more... it's perfect fow B&W where noise/grain is not a real problem and stepping down and/or using zonefocus is a real fun experience)

--> i regret not buying an APO-SL Prime Lense from the start...

Edited September 24, 2023 by MFT-Lehrling

[Chris Nebard]

As always, Stuart Richardson makes some well considered points (post #5) above. I love using the M-Summicron 50 and M-Summarit 75 on the SL2-s and actually prefer the experience to using them on my previous M cameras. Some Leica users won’t tolerate it, but, extending one of Stuart’s points, I find the Sigma i Contemporary primes are excellent on the SL2-s. They are native L Mount lenses and, although they are not in the same league as the Apo Summicron SL lenses, again extending Stuart’s point, they are more than capable if you are not printing very large. I (and, I’m sure, many others) have used the Sigmas professionally with results my clients have liked. They cannot compare to the SL Apo primes but they suit my needs because they autofocus, they have aperture rings, they are light but beautifully built and the IQ is still excellent. Between these and my 2 M primes, I get 24-75 coverage. 
First two with the 50 M-Summicron, third with the Sigma 35 f2. Apologies for repeating these if you’ve seen them in my other posts.

Good luck with your choices!

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[otto.f]

14 hours ago, lencap said:

So, for those that went with M mount lenses, are you happy with your decision

No I wasn’t, I had the SL but that won’t make a difference for your question. A very nice camera, imagewise, but too bulky and heavy for what I like to  shoot. It’s not fit for street photography, whereas the M10-R is also capable to do things where the SL is meant for, but that’s not the major part of my work. I work with R lenses 180 and 280 on the M10-R  with no problems. You will loose the image stabilization but that was not in your question.

Edited September 24, 2023 by otto.f

[Ken Abrahams]

This is a shot taken with the Summicron SL 50 Asph cropped 100% in and shot at f8. We were testing a few lenses in the studio today. I have been researching a better focal length lens for my street shooting. I am using the 21 SEM recently instead of my 35mm lenses. I really like using the wider lens for the work however have come to the conclusion that a 28mm lens might suit me better. 

Yesterday I was in the Camera shop but they didnt have a 28 Summilux in stock so I tested the 50 Summilux 1.4. I was astounded by its solid weight in my hand. It's probably the most dense lens for size and weight I have held in my hand. Compared to the 50 Summicron SL Asph its (Summilux M) much heavier. I really like the 50 Summicron SL lens mainly because it's light and quick to focus and no slouch for resolution. 

I have no issue with using M lenses on the SL2 or SL2S. The only reason for investing in SL lenses is because of the APO 35 SL Summicron and the VE 90-280. I am sure if I purchase the 28 mm Summicron that it will work a treat on the SL cameras as well as the M10M and M9M 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited September 24, 2023 by Ken Abrahams

[huwm]

The Abu 7000 is my favourite fishing reel ever.

I bought it in the early 1970’s and still works beautifully.

Most memorable fish caught with it was a 9lb Bass from a rocky spot off the Gower, here in wet Wales.

[toyfel]

How about the Q3? Small, great lens, AF and 60 MP, so you can use crop mode to emulate 50mm FOV and still have good resolution (ca 20 MP with 50mm crop mode). Another alternative could be the Lumix S5 II if you prefer interchangeable lens option.

[GFW2-SCUSA]

This conversation speaks to Leica's folly in dropping the wonderful, small, tidy CL.  Though it was not full frame it is a wonderful camera on which M lenses are very happy. I do use M lenses on my SL 2 and they are more than fine, but I find the SL large. I use M10 the most.  My CL is dandy and is my go=everywhere camera. If you can live with not having full frame, I would encourage you to try the CL. 

[dpitt]

11 hours ago, GFW2-SCUSA said:

This conversation speaks to Leica's folly in dropping the wonderful, small, tidy CL.  Though it was not full frame it is a wonderful camera on which M lenses are very happy. I do use M lenses on my SL 2 and they are more than fine, but I find the SL large. I use M10 the most.  My CL is dandy and is my go=everywhere camera. If you can live with not having full frame, I would encourage you to try the CL. 

+1

And I can fully recomend my experience with the TL2 with EVF. Since you already are in the L mount eco system, maybe consider a tiny TL lens like the Summicron 23 TL(35mm eq) ? It would maybe even be the perfect solution on your SL2-S for the situations you do not want to carry the 50 SL lens. You give up some pixels, but you gain a lot in size and you still have AF.

Add a TL2 or CL to your set and you have an even better compact kit. 24MP and in most cases the difference with the results of the SL2-S will be hard to see.

Edited September 25, 2023 by dpitt

[padam]

I have a similar problem lasting for basically when I started photography as I quickly got into manual lenses on mirrorless bodies.

I find it totally ridiculous that Leica is 'unable' (I mean, unwilling) to produce a small FF mirrorless body. I can only hope that the end of the CL means that there is a gaping hole in their lineup, that has to be filled in. But maybe too many people support their current models, so there is no incentive to do it and eat into M/SL/Q sales in one go...

People like to complain about the M240 but it's nothing compared to SL bodies which I've used for over 2 years, using small lenses does not make much difference, they still feel like bricks, actually feels more right to use heavier lenses with them. Great EVF, compatibility with M lenses is a big plus, great image quality and IBIS, but the fixed LCD, weight, size and of course price (would not be a consideration without all the flaws) are big drawbacks in my opinion. I also touch the dials accidentally, but maybe it's just me, and getting to know other cameras there are quite a few things, which are implemented better usability-wise. One plus to the weight at least is that I find it easier to keep the camera level for stills and video.

My first camera was the NEX5N. Unknowingly, I hit a home run with it. Not only it is amongst the lightest cameras out there (now also the cheapest, if you can find a good one), unlike later models, it has a 'proper' (capacitive) tilting touchscreen. 16:9 ratio, quite small for stills (but in today's world with all the video features it would be so much better...). You just touch it and it magnifies instantly where you want it and goes back by touching the shutter (latter seems like a small thing, but the SL2 or Canon cameras not do that after magnifying and it's really infuriating). Other cameras do not work the same way or at least I don't remember trying one, but maybe someone here can point out a camera I've missed, as I think this is a useful feature and it seems like camera companies are not trying very hard to aid MF shooters.

For the the body that felt most right with M lenses is the Sony A7S. Feels light and nimble in my hand, ready to hit the street (moving to generation II is already different). Unfortunately, rather old by today's standards (12MP, loud shutter, limited silent mode, lesser EVF, etc. and can't even find a decent one anywhere) but in some ways it is better designed, no IBIS with a tilt screen (no touch though), both of these are the good imho. The weight does not shift unevenly to the left, and the screen does move the 'correct' way.

Finding an 'old-school' FF mirrorless like this in today's world is actually quite difficult.

I found the EOS R to handle decently with M lenses, it has the best grip of any mirrorless camera I tried, the weight is balanced, and the much hated touch bar is not bad for MF, you just swipe it right to magnify and left to move back - moving the area is another matter though... Unfortunately, it is also one of the worst offenders when it comes to performance with smearing and magenta corners similar to the A7S in the wrong ways, loud shutter and limited silent mode, and Canon has sure made flip screens popular...
My current body is an R6 Mark II, got it for a great deal. (If you are an SL user, you do not want to know how well this camera works even an SL3 will not likely compete...). Performance is better, but again, IBIS makes it feel unbalanced with small lenses, just not really made for old glass. For the most part those are still just sitting idle, as I just use the "compact and lightweight" RF 28-70 I don't need to carry anything else (the SL 24-90 was an amazing lens, but imho this is more amazing and the camera body can made better use of it).


The Nikon Zf does not seem like it has the size and weight to be really nimble, and again, uses the LCD that excites vloggers rather than photographers. I don't buy the idea of hiding the screen. How are you going to move the area that you are magnifying without a joystick? Yep...
So maybe I just try a used Z6 (maybe a Z7 is a hair better with M lenses but it's still no Leica) just to see if I like it or not as apart from the design, the Zf really does not provide much new for manual lens users (face-detect magnifying seems interesting, but if there are multiple people in the shoot it might be too clever for its own good).

[dkCambridgeshire]

Armchair camera designers should realise that designing & developing a new and smaller FF ICL camera, is not just a matter of shoving a FF sensor into an APS-C size body. Design and development takes several years, costs many, many, $'000, and Leica will only design cameras which sell in sufficient numbers to make the projects, as a whole, profitable. Also bear in mind that ICL camera sales are declining and Leica's market share is a fraction of that of Sony, Fuji, Canon, Nikon, and Ricoh.  

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[padam]

The basic architecture is already there in the S5 series of cameras. It is not about the numbers not making sense. It is about a snowball effect on their whole line-up.
People would not need to agonize as much about choosing between a Q or an SL or an M (with an EVF add-on).
So yes, it might not increase their market share in that regard, I guess they know their market very well, although the SL Summicrons prove that they can't just ignore the lower-end part of the market, just needs to generate more revenue than for instance the Summarit-M line, leaving that to Voigtländer.

Edited September 26, 2023 by padam